Two years after the European Parliament passed the Artificial Intelligence Act, MEPs this week finally adopted a report on copyright and generative AI.

On Tuesday, March 10, Parliament passed its resolution on “Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges” with an overwhelming majority of 460 votes to 71, and with 88 abstentions.

The report calls for the EU and its 27 member states to focus on the crucial issues of how AI and tech companies engage with copyright-protected music in the digital age, and presents a licensing system as a solution, paving the way for fair compensation for the use of creative works.

The European Parliament’s vote, led by rapporteur Axel Voss (EPP, Germany), is a stride in the right direction, say music industry reps. But there’s considerable work to be done.  

“As the European Commission is currently assessing the EU copyright framework, the Parliament has clearly recognized the need for action to ensure fairness, transparency and appropriate remuneration for creators in the generative AI market,” said Adriana Moscoso del Prado, GM of GESAC, the European group of societies of authors and composers. “This political report also stresses the importance of safeguarding the integrity of the European legal system, which must apply equally to all services operating in the EU, while ensuring a level playing field for Europe’s innovative businesses.”

This vote, notes Moscoso del Prado, adds to the growing recognition at EU level of what is at stake: innovation, fairness and cultural sovereignty must go hand in hand.”

The European Composer and Songwriter Alliance (ECSA) also welcomes the outcome as one that addresses the organization’s repeated calls for a democratic debate on the interplay between copyright and generative AI.

Next up, remarks Helienne Lindvall, songwriter and ECSA president, the European Commission must turn words into action.

“Today’s adoption of this resolution by the European Parliament marks an important step towards ensuring consent, transparency, and remuneration of rightsholders in the context of AI, answering our calls for a long-overdue democratic debate on these issues,” notes Lindvall.

“We now urge the European Commission to duly take into account these crucial recommendations by proposing an additional legal framework to safeguard authors’ rights in the age of AI.”

IMPALA’s executive chair Helen Smith echoes those comments. “Whilst we do not agree with all the recommendations in the report, we fully agree exclusive rights are key,” Smith explains. “We also welcome the parliament’s emphasis on the importance of voluntary licensing. As far as our members, European independent music companies, are concerned, voluntary licensing – whether individual or collective – based on exclusive rights and contractual freedom to decide whether to authorize is key to build a licensing market for the use of copyright-protected music by GenAI models.”

The trade body, which represents more than 6,000 independent music companies across Europe, is calling on the European Parliament and European Commission to focus on implementation of the current copyright regime “rather than look to open it up.”

AI isn’t a buzz word in Europe. It’s seen as both a gift and a threat to a creative sector which generates an estimated 6.9% of the EU’s GDP. 

“We need clear rules for the use of copyright-protected content for AI training,” rapporteur Voss said after the vote. “Legal certainty would let AI developers know which content can be used and how licences can be obtained. On the other hand, rightsholders would be protected against unauthorized use of their content and receive remuneration. If we want to promote and develop AI in Europe while also protecting our creators, then these provisions are absolutely indispensable.”

Read more here.

BRISBANE, Australia — The Queensland Music Awards are on the move.

The 2026 edition of the QMAs will be presented April 22 at the Miami Marketta on the Gold Coast, marking the first time the ceremony has been hosted outside of Brisbane, the state capital. 

“This year, the QMAs returns to its roots,” remarks Kris Stewart CEO of QMusic, which presents the QMAs with support by the Queensland Government through Arts Queensland. “We’re putting the art and artists at the center by returning to an informal ‘music-first’ show that prioritizes the important things: music and mates.”

The move to the Gold Coast, about 50 miles south of the future Olympic city, is a restart after the brouhaha that soured last year’s event at Fortitude Music Hall. On that occasion, organizers were lashed when the jazz award was won by a pro-Palestinian instrumental piece, and its creator gave an impassioned speech on the night which touched on human rights violations in the Middle East.

In the fall-out, Brisbane City Council’s conservative Lord Mayor pulled funding for the QMAs, understood to be worth A$25,000, and openly questioned “whether the awards have been hijacked by extremists.”

The Gold Coast and its mayor Tom Tait

Established in 2006, the QMAs celebrate the state’s “brightest emerging artists and established legends” in the Sunshine State, with its categories judged by more than 100 music industry professionals. The three major awards are the lifetime achievement, album of the year, and song of the year, the winner of which has a permanent reminder by way of a plaque embedded into Brunswick Street Mall in Brisbane’s Fortitude Valley.

Nominees this year include Jem Cassar-Daley, Dami Im, The Jungle Giants, Amy Sheppard, DZ Deathrays, GLVES, Young Franco, and Meg Washington.

Also, artists will share in A$60,000 across four scholarships and awards, which are targeted at local artists at pivotal stages of their careers and bear the names of music legends: Billy Thorpe, Carol Lloyd, Dennis ‘Mop’ Conlon and Grant McLennan.

Scholarship winners will be announced at the Parliamentary Friends of the Music Industry event on Wednesday, March 25. 

“As the industry evolves,” QMusic’s Stewart continues, “it can be easy to get lost in the grandness of the awards ecosystem and lose site of the rock ‘n roll attitude that bought us here. We’re excited to invite our incredible 2026 finalists to celebrate with us at our brand-new location as we connect and recognize the people who make this state such a powerful force in global music.”

See the full list of finalists here.

Making the journey from Sydney’s Northern Beaches to the Rock Hall in Cleveland wasn’t something INXS’ Garry Gary Beers had on his bingo card for 2026.

It’s not a pipe dream.

The new wave legends are finally nominated for the Rock And Roll Hall of Fame, some 21 years after the Australian act was initially eligible. Despite the long wait, Beers is chuffed with the recognition.

“So a lot has been happening in my world in the last week or so.  I guess the big one is the R&R Hall of Fame nomination,” he writes on his social pages. “I’ve always downplayed the importance of this to me for a few reasons- the main being that there were always other artists more deserving etc etc.  So time has passed and here’s the nomination and I have to say I’m pretty proud of us Aussie boys from the Northern Beaches getting nominated to be in such amazing company.”

Formed back in 1977, INXS would go on to climb rock’s highest summit. The sextet of Andrew (keyboards), Jon (drums), and Tim Farriss (lead guitar), along with Beers, Kirk Pengilly (guitar/sax), and the late frontman Michael Hutchence, went on to sell more than 50 million records worldwide, landing five top 20 albums on the Billboard 200, and a No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 with Kick’s “Need You Tonight.”

In the United Kingdom, the band landed six top 10 albums, including a No. 1 with Welcome To Wherever You Are from 1992, plus a BRIT Award in 1991 for best international group.

Following Hutchence’s untimely passing in 1997, aged 37, the band pushed on with a cast of singers, including Noiseworks’ Jon Stevens, J.D. Fortune (from the reality TV competition Rock Star: INXS) and Ciaran Gribbin, but they were unable to recapture the magic of their heyday.

INXS performed their final concert on Nov. 11, 2012, though their music lives. And thanks to several shrewd syncs and film projects, and tireless support from superfans, those hits appear to be finding new fans in the streaming age. Last July, the classic 1987 song “Never Tear Us Apart” came in at No. 1 on triple j’s inaugural poll of the greatest Australian songs of all-time.

“We are honored to be included in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame list of nominees for 2026,” Pengilly recently wrote on Instagram. “INXS family of fans and friends, we wouldn’t have been nominated without you… We are up against some incredible Artists.”

As they enter their 50th anniversary, INXS is one of 10 first-time nominees on Rock Hall ballot, a 17-strong tally includes Phil Collins, Iron Maiden and Pink.

Fans have until April 3 to cast votes on the Rock Hall, after which the Class of 2026 will be unveiled.

Wiz Khalifa is not a fan of AI infiltrating Hollywood. During Monday’s The Sesh livestream, the Taylor Gang boss slammed Scream 7 for its use of AI and deepfakes to resurrect characters in the film.

Wiz called the film “trash” and blasted the directors and writers for trying to capitalize on current issues like AI, which felt forced.

“Yeah, I went and seen Scream. That sh– was trash, bro,” he began. “The thing that was trash about it was the use of AI and deepfake. That sh– was trash. I don’t know if y’all have seen it yet, but you can tell some writer just was like, ‘We have to add this.’ And that sh– is so forced and f—ing corny, bro.”

Wiz continued: “You should let people make movies about sh– that’s going to happen later. Like not try to base it so much off of right now that you just completely lose the plot. That s—t is trash because you’re trying to capitalize so much off of what’s going on right now that you’re not even really f—ing getting the point.”

The 38-year-old explained that the movies he grew up on focused on predicting what the future could look like, rather than detailing the present day.

“Just the difference is movies showed you what the future was gonna look like. They had FaceTime on phones back then, they had signs that said ‘in the year 2025′ and they was flying some sh–,” he said. “Now that everything caught up to that, they not trying to tell us what the future gon’ look like. They stopped doing that sh– in movies.

The Pittsburgh native added: “They started having influencers and basically trying to capitalize on what popular sh– looks like right now and that’s bullsh–. So, Scream, they lost the plot. There was a scene, this bi— couldn’t get in her car and see just ran to go get her daughter. That sh– was crazy.”

The Scream series has been known to play off societal issues and current trends in the past. For Scream 7, the film opted to revive Stu Macher (played by Matthew Lillard in the original film) through an AI deepfake.

Khalifa has been making his presence in Hollywood felt, as he notched a role in Moses the Black and helmed the movie’s soundtrack. There’s been plenty of music from the “Black and Yellow” rapper as well this year. Wiz released his Khaotic and Girls Love Horses projects in 2026’s first quarter.

Watch the full stream from Wiz below. Talk about Scream 7 starts shortly after the 22-minute mark.

A new lawsuit claims a composer of the University of Michigan’s iconic “Let’s Go Blue” marching band anthem wrongly got the song removed from Electronic Arts’ successful College Football video game series.

Albert Ahronheim, who co-wrote “Let’s Go Blue” while studying at Michigan in 1975, faces federal copyright and contract interference claims in a Tuesday (March 10) complaint. The case was brought by music publishing companies Theodore Presser and Carl Fischer, which have administered the “Let’s Go Blue” composition rights since 1978.

According to the lawsuit, Presser and Fischer scored a lucrative synch deal with Electronic Arts (EA) in 2024 to place the song in College Football, which had recently returned from a long hiatus after the NCAA loosened player restrictions on name, image and likeness. The publishers say College Football became “the all-time best-selling sports video game in the U.S,” and Ahronheim was paid royalties for the synch.

However, trouble later arose when Ahronheim began to assert that he actually owned the song’s composition rights, not Presser and Fischer. Ahronheim allegedly demanded that EA either buy a license from him directly or remove “Let’s Go Blue” from College Football. The video game juggernaut chose the latter.

“Ahronheim’s acts as described above, including but not limited to his threat to commence litigation against EA and his false statement of copyright ownership to EA were wrongful and improper, because Ahronheim has and had no legal right to assert any claim of copyright ownership in the composition,” reads the lawsuit. “As a result of Ahronheim’s actions, EA has discontinued the use of the composition in past and future editions of the game.”

The ownership dispute stems from the so-called termination right, a tenet of copyright law that allows artists and songwriters who sell their work to claw back the rights after 35 years. Termination rights have recently become a hot-button issue in music law, with a major appeal ruling questioning their global reach and Salt-N-Pepa invoking them in a messy ownership fight against Universal Music Group.

Ahronheim sent Presser and Fischer a termination notice back in 2011, asserting that he wanted to take back the “Let’s Go Blue” composition rights when the 35-year window closed in 2013. But the publishers say this notice was invalid and unenforceable because of a technicality: Ahronheim failed to make an official report to the U.S. Copyright Office before the 2013 effective date.

Now, Presser and Fischer are asking a judge to declare that they are, in fact, the sole owners of the “Let’s Go Blue” rights. They’re also seeking financial penalties for Ahronheim’s alleged interference with the EA sync license.

“Plaintiffs have been damaged by Ahronheim’s tortious acts in an amount to be determined at trial, because such acts have injured plaintiffs’ existing economic relationship with EA,” the lawsuit says.

Ahronheim could not immediately be reached for comment on Tuesday. EA did not return a request for comment.